Walt Disney World Resort announces "Frozen" ride for EPCOT

[JAHill]

Frozen is a fad.

[BoddaH1994]

Not to mention that there are wonderful possibilities for a ride based on that movie...

[RingMaster]

While this is only a single attraction being installed in one location, I can understand people's fervor towards Disney films overstepping boundaries by installing rides in abnormal locations (IE: outside Fantasyland), as we've essentially "finished" a decade-long Pixarmageddon across almost every Disney park on the planet. Not to mention several big-time attractions being given a Disney mascot makeover and diminishing the experience quite a bit, such as Tarzan's Treehouse, The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh and Stitch's Great Escape (formerly Swiss Family Robinson Treehouse, Country Bear Jamboree and Alien Encounter).

I'm just wondering how the next decade is going to be with Star Wars potentially being waged among the parks...

[LordSkippy]

Frozen is a fad.

Just like every other Disney movie ever, right?

[westcoaster]

Yes things change its sad when old rides are re themed re imagined, times change and new adventures begin:

[thekidd33]

What is the definition of a classic in 2014? Consumer trends are so dramatically different then they were even 15-20 years ago. People are so engrossed with immediate satisfaction that parks are more or less painted into a corner when dealing with rides based on IPs.

Option 1: Open a ride to coincide with the release of a movie. This eliminates any ride on the scale of Harry Potter or even Toy Story Mania because no one is going to green light a 8 figure ride expenditure with no idea how the movie will be received.

Option 2: Do a quick re-theme/show/meet and greet when a movie is deemed a hit. This honestly is probably the best financial choice for the park but also the one that riles up the hardcore fans the most. The park can say "Hey we have a Frozen ride!" and "Come meet Olaf!", which is plenty for some people who just another fix. However, it starts to look like a money grab (which it is) and traditionalists light up the interwebs with their complaints.

Option 3: Wait 5/10/15 years to see if a property has staying power. This is the option that allows for the Harry Potter and the Toy Story Mania's to be built. The multimillion dollar E-Ticket attractions that everyone talks about. The issue, especially in today's world, is that these types of IPs are so few and far between. Consumer interest in a product is often very short lived. A number of trip reports on various sites have mentioned how surprisingly low the crowds in the new Gringotts area at Universal has been following the opening couple of weeks. It is a gamble that is difficult to know when to take.

(This written on mobile so I apologize for any spelling or grammatical errors I missed.)

[TTD-120-420]

I've never understood the hate when it comes to "money grabs." I understand the hate if this turns out to be a quick and cheap fix, but if they put some time into it and it turns out to be a cool ride, who cares? Why is making money such a sore spot for some people?

[thekidd33]

Because the majority of people don't look at parks as businesses. They see them as entities that exist to bring them enjoyment and a break from the 'real world'.

[Italian Job 2005]

I am one of those who think that World Showcase should strictly be World Showcase. Not movies. One of the things I love about Disney World is that they're so many "world destinations" all within the resort. There are all sorts of themed hotels unique to their area or era of the world that they're representing (I.g. Port Orleans - New Orleans, Fort Wilderness - Camping, Polynesian Village - Hawaii). Same should be to World Showcase. Strictly themes to that world. Not Disney movies. There's enough Disney movies throughout the rest of the parks.

[jbt]

Maelstrom is a fun ride. I think part of the backlash comes from it being the last of the non-modified 1980s rides at EPCOT. Or maybe because, instead of finally adding rides to other country pavillions, they are removing 50% of them by closing Maelstrom.

The park doesn't really resemble the theme of what it was when it opened in 1982 (education, science, optimism about the future, oil industry sponsorships, etc.). Bringing more Disney characters into the World Showcase section just further muddles the theme.

Then again, maybe everyone's just blowing the removal of a classic ride out of proportion. After all, it's not like anyone regrets Mission: Space replacing Horizons.

Right?

[LovinMeSomeBanshee]

Frozen is the highest grossing animated film of all-time. It has an unreal cult following of young girls. You'd have to be an idiot to NOT exploit that.

[Absurd]

I feared this news. What a travesty; a beloved work of art is going to die soon, and with its successor, Disney has chosen to disgrace its own creative integrity. Clearly, Disney is determined to milk the cow for as much as it's worth, but they needn't be so shameful; maintaining artistic integrity, or even ascending it, can work in tangent with maximizing profits. If you don't believe me, take a look at the truly beautiful, and very profitable, work that has been done in recent years at Universal Orlando and Tokyo Disney(Owned by The Oriental Land Company).

Or, explore DisneyWorld's (or DisneyLand's) past, and you will find darning evidence that such tastelessness is unnecessary for the kind of profits Disney wants.

Edited September 14, 2014 by Absurd

[purdude86]

I'm mixed on this. I liked the Maelstrom, but that was partly since it was the only real ride in World Showcase to me. (I know Mexico has one but it jsut floats gently past scenes so not real thrilling in anyway.) But it was fun and celebrated teh culture. Norway was already small so kind of disappointing to see so much of it being taken over by solely a movie. Hopefully they still have enough to celebrate adn teach teh culture adn lad of Norway.

However I am excited to see a new ride as the area did need some love and something new to it besides just restaurants. Hopefully this will be done well adn be a quality attraction. And if it is a success be ncie to see some other attractions added into other lands such as the adding the new Ratatouille dark ride to the France pavilion or even a new Beauty and The Beast one if they wanted to do something brand new.

[shark6495]

I'm sort of surprised that people are calling Frozen a fad or a money grab. As others have said it's the highest grossing animated film. The movie is a good one. People loved the Incredibles, Wall-E, and Tangled, but none of those movies stayed in the collective thoughts as much as Frozen did.

Did you know the Frozen soundtrack was the #7 top sold CD last month? That's a year after it came out. It's till a top 10 CD sold, at a time when many people own the Blue Ray.

Little Mermaid and the likes didn't get rides immediately. But that's not a reason to not put in a current ride or area. The Land has an entire area themed to Cars. Lightning McQueen and Elsa are probably bigger than Mickey for most Disney aged kids.

I think we have a tendency to forget the main reasons WDW and DL along with all the other Disney Parks are in operating for.

1. Make money

2. Let families create shared experiences and bonds

3. Let children of all ages meet the characters they enjoy.

Someone mentioned the movie the Rescuers. Yes that was a good film but 1-2 years after it was out most forgot or didn't mention them at all. And yes Disney will and has slapped Olaf on lunch boxes because kids want him.

You can spend your days upset that the past is the past or you can make the most from today. Plus if Maelstorm was a super popular ride, it wouldn't be changing. Tower of Terror isn't being changed anytime soon.

[malem]

Maelstrom is my favorite (existing) ride at Epcot, so I'll certainly be sad to see it go.

At the same time, Frozen will be a major, major draw for that park. Hopefully enough to justify other significant investments.

[bkroz]

The truth is that if Maelstrom opened today, Disney Parks fans would decry it as a flop. They'd point out its non sequitur storytelling, its static figures, its "obvious money grab" by appealing to the government of Norway for sponsorship ("Oil derricks in Epcot? Really?!") and deride it as a waste of company resources, not living up to what Imagineering can do.

But as the case happens to be, Epcot as it was in the 1980s really burrowed into Disney Parks fans' heads. Even many of my peers (born late 80s / early 90s) who can't even remember the "original" Epcot still cite it as the thing that got them interested in Imagineering. World of Motion, Journey into Imagination, Horizons... All gone. Maelstrom was a last hold-out of that era that they cling to so specifically.

As it is now, the question is how much of Maelstrom (if any) will be reused.

The Frozen ride is due to open in early 2016, which is, let's say, sixteen months from now. Given THAT timetable, my first instinct is that Maelstrom will be demolished, its showbuilding extended, and a brand new ride built in its place simply reusing some of the old showbuilding's footprint. Simply re-designing scenes and adding Anna / Elsa animatronics to the existing ride would NOT take sixteen months, would it? But it IS Walt Disney World, so...

[shark6495]

I would disagree with you by saying 16 months (even though, admittedly I have not the slightest idea how long it takes to build and test a ride) is about the right amount for Disney to perfect everything (with some time to open early if needed?)

Even in a perfect world to rewire/repaint/refurnish the ride (with just adding the Frozen story line to the current layout) would take maybe 9-12 months? So maybe the 16 month is a way for official opening while soft openings happen at 12?

I honestly have no idea, how long it would take to change over a ride. How long did it take for Phantom Theater to become Scooby Doo?

[bkroz]

An off-season.

Universal Orlando went from empty lot to Transformers: The Ride - 3D grand opening in a bit under 11 months.

I think a high-quality re-themed along the existing Maelstrom circuit could be done in 9 months. However, I trust that Disney in this case recognizes the benefit of speed and that they'll work to have a Frozen attraction as soon as possible. The fact that they've given themselves 16 months would, optimistically, indicate that the ride will be completely original and NOT simply a retrofit of the Maelstrom layout.

Honestly, we should hope not... Maelstrom is a four-and-a-half minute ride... The alarmingly brief Little Mermaid dark ride at Magic Kingdom and Disney California Adventure is six-and-a-half. And thankfully, since it's an omnimover, it's a walk-on so it feels alright. Even if children are delighted, I think parents would have great distaste for a 2, 3, 4, 5 hour wait for a 4 minute boat ride... And capacity... Oh my.

Cross-threading, a summer day at Epcot will produce 2-hour waits for Test Track, Mission: SPACE, Soarin', and this Frozen ride. "CHOOSE ONE." But don't worry! While you'll only get one tier-1 attraction, you'll have a reserved Fastpass+ window for Captain EO and Journey into YOUR Imagination... With Figment! Woohoo!

[The Interpreter]

You will. I won't.

I'll be near beautiful, downtown Burbank.

[upstop]

I'm sure it's been a year or more in the planning. They probably have several features ready to install for the ride at the right moment.

In a post movie interview, it was stated that they were planning a Broadway musical and "it wasn't a matter of if, but when"; therefore, I'm sure the Imagineering design cogs were turning prior to the movies initial release last November.

....I wonder if they will have a "final ride" on Maelstrom?

[malem]

its "obvious money grab" by appealing to the government of Norway for sponsorship ("Oil derricks in Epcot? Really?!")

Of course, most (all?) World Showcase pavilions were originally created with the participation of the represented countries. Like much of Epcot, promotional possibilities were considered from the beginning.

I am curious what involvement, if any, Norway had with this decision. I imagine that they are thrilled that millions of visitors will visit Norway (the pavilion) for the ride based on Disney's biggest new franchise in a long time.

Best of all, perhaps, Norway isn't likely to be footing any of the bill for this particular attraction.

[bkroz]

Norway thrilled? Uhhh...

http://www.dailyfinance.com/2014/07/24/frozen-norway-disney-epcot/

(Turn CC to "ON")

[Voicetek]

^I read the article. So Disney's basically taking a massive crap on Norway and their culture and still hopes that they'll fund the pavilion. If I were Norway I'd be ticked. How can anyone expect Norway to be like, "Yeah you're removing the one ride that shows represents our culture and folklore only to replace it with a ride based on a fictional land slightly inspired by us, but yeah, we'll be glad to keep funding our pavilion." Ridiculous! However, Disney's being extremely generous by telling them that they can continue to fund their pavilion for just $9 million. Yep. That sounds about right to me.

[malem]

According to that news report, funding from Norway stopped in 2002. The current ride probably isn't drawing many into Epcot, and it's apparently in need of refurbishment. For Disney, unfortunately at times, money talks.

That $9 million sounds like cheap advertising, considering the certain popularity of the Frozen ride. For substantially more, they could probably remodel the entire pavilion (including the ride) to fit their tastes.

Even if they don't pay, just having the ride (which will likely be the most popular in the park) in Norway is going to a valuable promotional asset. Albeit, less valuable than the entire pavilion celebrating your culture and heritage.

It's not surprising that Norwegians aren't happy. It's a huge downgrade for them, and it's a huge loss for World Showcase. I'm cautiously optimistic that renewed popularity will finally spur much-needed investments into that park.

[Absurd]

The truth is that if Maelstrom opened today, Disney Parks fans would decry it as a flop. They'd point out its non sequitur storytelling, its static figures, its "obvious money grab" by appealing to the government of Norway for sponsorship ("Oil derricks in Epcot? Really?!") and deride it as a waste of company resources, not living up to what Imagineering can do.

But as the case happens to be, Epcot as it was in the 1980s really burrowed into Disney Parks fans' heads. Even many of my peers (born late 80s / early 90s) who can't even remember the "original" Epcot still cite it as the thing that got them interested in Imagineering. World of Motion, Journey into Imagination, Horizons... All gone. Maelstrom was a last hold-out of that era that they cling to so specifically.

As it is now, the question is how much of Maelstrom (if any) will be reused.

The Frozen ride is due to open in early 2016, which is, let's say, sixteen months from now. Given THAT timetable, my first instinct is that Maelstrom will be demolished, its showbuilding extended, and a brand new ride built in its place simply reusing some of the old showbuilding's footprint. Simply re-designing scenes and adding Anna / Elsa animatronics to the existing ride would NOT take sixteen months, would it? But it IS Walt Disney World, so...

There is a tasteful and appreciable difference between a ride that promotes cultural education, and a cartoon showcase shoehorned into an area themed in stark contrast. I have no problem with a "cartoon showcase;" I like cartoons, and I am not naive to the economic benefits of commercialism, but I'm disgusted when said commercialism comes before artistic integrity- as I said before, the two can work in tangent. That bygone era of Epcot was exemplary of this, which is probably the reason its image has resonated so well with so many who only know it through second hand. Disney could learn a lot from its own history.

[shark6495]

This message board, like the rest of the internet, is a big echo chamber. We hear/read the info that we like to see/believe and it makes our opinions grow deeper.

If we are to look at it purely from an economic side, the ride is aging and the company needs a fresh way to bring people to that park. This move is no different than putting Aladdin and Jasmine in their land in Epcot.

From an artistic point, yes it's sad but it's not a museum piece. One day all rides will give their last rides to be replaced by something that some will say is a shoddy replacement.

There are a few of us who despise that Stunt Coaster replaced the Antique Cars. But we tend to ignore the price of gas, and maintenance of those vehicles. When SC leaves there will be a generation or 3 that will mourn its loss and hate it's replacement.

Movies like Frozen do not happen all the time. If Disney wanted to put this in New Fantasyland that would be great, but they have a land that is in need of an influx of new blood and energy.

If the Norway Tourism board was concerned about the way they are being represented in Disney then I would have expected them to be making monetary donations or payments to help upkeep that land.

Odds are this will be a great ride experience that many will enjoy.

[BB1]

^Why did we not have an ATLANTIS themed attraction in Norway instead? If you know the theme of some of the latter spin offs and the latter "film" it takes a deep Deluge into Nordic idealogies. Maybe it is that I loved Atlantis and that it was one of the last of the mythological films in my POV.

I definitely do not want to build a snow man sir Olaf, nor Elisa.

[shark6495]

Could it be because Atlantis was a major flop?

http://jimhillmedia.com/editor_in_chief1/b/jim_hill/archive/2003/08/11/165.aspx

Take for example what happened back during the summer of 2001. Most Tinsel Town insiders felt that Walt Disney Pictures had a pretty decent shot at success with its animated action-adventure film, "Atlantis: The Lost Empire." But "A:TLE" turned out to be a real disappointment, grossing only $84 million (which hardly came close to cover its production costs, never mind the tens of millions more that Disney poured into the marketing of the movie).

So what went wrong with "Atlantis: The Lost Empire?" Well, to hear Disney Studio insiders tell it, "A:TLE" really was a project with plenty of promise. At least when the production initially started out. But then "Atlantis" lost its one real chance at box office success as the project's film-makers -- under the guidance of WDFA's allegedly Creative VPs -- kept second-guessed themselves. Fixing and futzing with their film until "Atlantis: The Lost Empire" had become a pale shadow of what it once was.

You may enjoy and watch Atlantis, but I could not tell you anything more about that movie other than Michael J Fox (maybe?) was the voice of the guy who somehow was leading an expedition to find the lost city, or something.

I think people have a tendency to hate things that are popular in a proportionate amount. If Frozen did poorly, it would get the kind of hate it is getting. But because its so wildly popular with people of all ages, has catchy music, has influenced pop culture, and has found a way to really get that sweet spot of taking over, more people hate it.

We will take a look at Atlantis vs Frozen

Box Office:

Frozen: 400 Million

Atlantis: 84 Million (to date)

I think we could look at CD sales, merchandise sales, etc. But its all Frozen. Disney didnt force this on us. It was a solid film that hit people in the right way. Similar to Lion King, Aladdin, Little Mermaid, Etc.

[RailRider]

Some things never cease to amaze me.

For the last few years the inter-webs have been abuzz with how Disney is so slow to role a new attraction out and to capitalize on what could be a lucrative addition to the parks. The comparison is always made between Universal and Harry Potter. Yet Disney is always lambasted for being slow to react and implement new things in the parks. Now comes Frozen and Disney is moving much quicker, yet the inter-webs are upset over Maelstrom?

Maelstrom? Really, Maelstrom? A sub par ride, with horrible capacity and no real story. Be honest has anyone ever visited Epcot to solely ride Maelstrom? I think not. Those of you that are so upset of the removal of Maelstrom, have you ever ridden Maelstrom? Sorry it does not stack up to other Disney rides, Trolls, Oil Rigs and Polar Bears Oh My... My head hurts. They aren't removing Its a Small World or Splash Mountain for a new Frozen attraction, its Maelstrom. Did I mention its Maelstrom, a disjointed story of Norwegian Propaganda. The original version was to solely be based around trolls, not Oil Rigs and Polar Bears

Lets talk about Frozen. Frozen is the most successful animated film of all time. Of All Time, just in case you missed it the first time. Almost $1.3 Billion worldwide, if that isn't an instant classic I am not sure what is. For those that like rankings and lists of such it is currently the 5th highest grossing movie of all time and won a few Academy Awards, a Golden Globe and a few others, but who cares what the industry and critics think. I can tell you what my daughter and her friends think. Frozen has become ingrained in their minds and their social interactions. Be it singing Let it Go, pretending to be Queen Elsa (Much more popular than Anna) or just discussing how cute it would be to have a pet reindeer. Frozen is still on the tips of their tongues and the front of their minds a year after watching the movie in the theaters. I have never seen anything like it and when discussing going to Disney and the possibility of meeting Anna and Elsa, well the screams are so high pitched only dogs could hear it.

In the end Disney has set the bar so incredibly high that fanboys are always abuzz over displeasure in Disney's inability to bring new attractions to market quickly, the removal of older less popular attractions for new experiences, and how dare a crane show up during my Disney vacation. Follow some of the Disney News Sites out there and watch how they make a big deal over cranes and construction walls, yet make the same big deal that Disney never installs new attractions around current popular characters in a timely manner. Basically when you are as big and successful as Disney and do so many things right you cannot please everyone. Yet Joe Park Guest and his family will love the new Frozen attraction, will not realize it replaced a lackluster Norwegian boat ride, and Epcot will be a must visit park now. Let it Go...

[Voicetek]

^Yes, yes I have ridden Maelstrom. In fact, my wife and I were planning a trip to Epcot next month and when I found out Maelstrom was going to be closed, we changed our plans. We'll be visiting Hollywood Studios instead. See, Maelstrom was one of the few rides I always looked forward to at Epcot. With it's removal, it was one less thing there that I liked to do. Yes it might not have been the BEST ride at the Walt Disney World Resort, but it was rather unique in my opinion. I think it felt unique because it wasn't "up to Disney standards."

There is one other problem with this whole thing and that's the manner in which it was handled. First, get on any Walt Disney World forum and read the numerous complaints from people who've scheduled trips to Epcot in the upcoming months who've already scheduled their Fast Passes for a ride on Maelstrom. Now they're finding out that it's closed AFTER THE FACT that Disney had already let them schedule their rides. What's wrong with this? Perhaps Disney should've planned this out a bit better and when they had the slightest idea that they might be shutting it down, removed the option to Fast Pass Maelstrom. Now they have many upset vacationers scrambling at the last minute to update their plans.

Should we also mention Norway's opinion in all this? How would you feel if you're sponsoring a pavilion at Epcot based on your customs, culture, and folklore and all of a sudden you hear that a section of it is being replaced by something that's based on a fictional land that's sorta kinda based on your country, but not really. So now instead of people coming to that area to learn about your country, 2-8 year olds and their parents are flocking there to take a ride through Arendelle instead, completely overlooking the TRUE country it was based on. Not only that, but Disney still expects you to sponsor that pavilion for the upkeep of the buildings and area around that ride. It's just sad really.

I just feel like it's not just about a Frozen ride being put at Epcot, that has nothing to do with it. Heck yes put in a Frozen ride, and a Tangled ride, a Hunchback of Notre Dame ride, and maybe even a Pocahontas ride, but do it someplace else because there's plenty of room. Don't tear the Norway pavilion apart and fill it with a bunch of make believe characters loosely based on the country you're putting them in - that's not what Epcot is about. Leave Norway, and the rest of the World Showcase, intact and find another place to put the fictional stuff.

Heck, I bet Disney is kicking themselves in the pants for not making a Frozen area in the New Fantasy Land. And now with that new realization, they're scrambling to find a place to shove this ride into. The Norway Pavilion is the closest thing they could come up with and it shows. With everything I've mentioned above, it just feels like a rushed decision to me. Only time will tell.

On a final note - I'm an animation addict/junkie, a huge Disney fan, lover of musicals, and as most of you know - I'm obsessed with dark rides. So, will I ride this ride when it's open? Yes I will. Will I like it? Probably. I guess we'll just have to wait and see. What's done is done and once the Frozen ride is installed, I'll accept that change happens and move on with my life and enjoy the new additions. However, I'll still miss the uniqueness that was Maelstrom.